US to ban electronic devices from flights
Discussion
RBH58 said:
El stovey said:
Right but it applies to European carriers as well as middle eastern ones. You said it didn't .
It will apply to any carrier that flys out of one of designated airports. But those are mainly Middle Eastern carriers and Turkish Airlines.Zod said:
Agreed. Lithium ion batteries above a certain size are currently banned hold luggage. Concentrating hundred of them together in the hold is stupid.
Airport security is poor in any case. They just look for what they've been told to look for. In Istanbul last week, they foudn my bottle of water in my rucksack, but I only realised when I got home that they had failed to notice the two litre camelbak bladder in there, that was two thirds full. I had flown with it from Munich to Istanbul the day before.
Agree.Airport security is poor in any case. They just look for what they've been told to look for. In Istanbul last week, they foudn my bottle of water in my rucksack, but I only realised when I got home that they had failed to notice the two litre camelbak bladder in there, that was two thirds full. I had flown with it from Munich to Istanbul the day before.
El stovey said:
I understand your point entirely. What you don't understand is that you can have a device that reacts when put together, you can't pre make it as it reacts when it's put together.
The devices you describe can be recognised by security measures.
You are clinging to an incredibly simplistic concept of some sort of Bond-style magic bomb that is made from pulling bits out of various other devices. Take a bit from here, one from here, add this circuit board and plug in your iPad and BOOM!The devices you describe can be recognised by security measures.
You seem completely unable to grasp what actually makes a bomb, a bomb. It's the explosives, silly. And these are eminently detectable. If the bad guys have access to some explosives which can't be detected, then it's game over. Note: Electronic devices don't magically morph into explosives when you start plugging bits from one into another.
Lucas Ayde said:
You are clinging to an incredibly simplistic concept of some sort of Bond-style magic bomb that is made from pulling bits out of various other devices. Take a bit from here, one from here, add this circuit board and plug in your iPad and BOOM!
You seem completely unable to grasp what actually makes a bomb, a bomb. It's the explosives, silly. And these are eminently detectable. If the bad guys have access to some explosives which can't be detected, then it's game over. Note: Electronic devices don't magically morph into explosives when you start plugging bits from one into another.
And so we are left with no identifiable extra risk from "checking in" or "carrying on" PEDs, but a significant additional risk from now having a cargo hold full of hundreds PEDs with lithium batteries. Brilliant!You seem completely unable to grasp what actually makes a bomb, a bomb. It's the explosives, silly. And these are eminently detectable. If the bad guys have access to some explosives which can't be detected, then it's game over. Note: Electronic devices don't magically morph into explosives when you start plugging bits from one into another.
Lucas Ayde said:
El stovey said:
I understand your point entirely. What you don't understand is that you can have a device that reacts when put together, you can't pre make it as it reacts when it's put together.
The devices you describe can be recognised by security measures.
You are clinging to an incredibly simplistic concept of some sort of Bond-style magic bomb that is made from pulling bits out of various other devices. Take a bit from here, one from here, add this circuit board and plug in your iPad and BOOM!The devices you describe can be recognised by security measures.
You seem completely unable to grasp what actually makes a bomb, a bomb. It's the explosives, silly. And these are eminently detectable. If the bad guys have access to some explosives which can't be detected, then it's game over. Note: Electronic devices don't magically morph into explosives when you start plugging bits from one into another.
Do you really not think it's possible to make a device perhaps not even an explosive one that could bring down an aircraft out of different components?
I've seen numerous devices with a multitude of designs and purposes over the years that have been found in uk airports. New designs are being developed all the time.
RBH58 said:
Yep....all of a sudden a hold full of unsupervised lithium batteries is now...overnight...safe,
I guess like Health & Safety, the security consultants have to be seen to be doing something or implementing something new all the time no matter if it improves the situation or not. I'm just waiting for the time someone makes exploding synthetics and we all have to wander through security in paper coveralls.Rather than targeting passengers I think air-side operators in some of the less developed countries needs to be addressed. Put a high vis vest on and a fake ID lanyard and I don't think they would pick you up for a very long time.
6th Gear said:
Interesting.Can the Gulf States not apply reciprocal bans? After all, what's sauce for the goose....
Uggers said:
Rather than targeting passengers I think air-side operators in some of the less developed countries needs to be addressed. Put a high vis vest on and a fake ID lanyard and I don't think they would pick you up for a very long time.
Anyone can see numerous holes in security systems. Determined terrorists are very difficult to stop. Once people get into airports it's pretty much the last line of defence.
Jonesy23 said:
The liquids thing did make great economic sense for certain bits of the industry though didn't it?
if we were talking real threats from liquids/mixing stuff then pyrotechnics, corrosives or toxic gas from mixing stuff would have been the thing to talk about.
You can indeed purchase legally high explosive that is dangerous only when mixed, for the mining industry etc. It is specifically for safe transportation on airplanes that it was invented....if we were talking real threats from liquids/mixing stuff then pyrotechnics, corrosives or toxic gas from mixing stuff would have been the thing to talk about.
I dismissed the idea offhand, when the liquid threat was first sprung forth, but there was long discussion in this very forum about it, and links to exactly what it was and where one can buy it.
However, as my earlier post pointed out, you can still fill half a dozen 90ml bottles with one part and take it on the plane, perfectly legally, and your buddy can carry on the same quantity of the other component......
King Herald said:
Jonesy23 said:
The liquids thing did make great economic sense for certain bits of the industry though didn't it?
if we were talking real threats from liquids/mixing stuff then pyrotechnics, corrosives or toxic gas from mixing stuff would have been the thing to talk about.
You can indeed purchase legally high explosive that is dangerous only when mixed, for the mining industry etc. It is specifically for safe transportation on airplanes that it was invented....if we were talking real threats from liquids/mixing stuff then pyrotechnics, corrosives or toxic gas from mixing stuff would have been the thing to talk about.
I dismissed the idea offhand, when the liquid threat was first sprung forth, but there was long discussion in this very forum about it, and links to exactly what it was and where one can buy it.
However, as my earlier post pointed out, you can still fill half a dozen 90ml bottles with one part and take it on the plane, perfectly legally, and your buddy can carry on the same quantity of the other component......
El stovey said:
Even in the UK, it's significantly easier and quicker to get an airside ID if you've just arrived in the UK than it is for long term UK citizens due to lack of employment history etc.
.
Let me assure everyone else - this is complete bulls.
t from El Stovey. To get an airside ID for any UK airport you need to provide a minimum 5 year history, and undergo a full criminal record check.
If you didn't live in the country for any extended period you'll need to get an appropriate criminal records check from the country you were residing in, or if you were travelling or on gap year, show proof of entry/exit from various countries and your visa stamps.
You can't just claim that you don't have 5 years worth of checkable history and expect to get a staff airport ID.
Shakermaker said:
El stovey said:
Even in the UK, it's significantly easier and quicker to get an airside ID if you've just arrived in the UK than it is for long term UK citizens due to lack of employment history etc.
.
Let me assure everyone else - this is complete bulls.
t from El Stovey. To get an airside ID for any UK airport you need to provide a minimum 5 year history, and undergo a full criminal record check.
If you didn't live in the country for any extended period you'll need to get an appropriate criminal records check from the country you were residing in, or if you were travelling or on gap year, show proof of entry/exit from various countries and your visa stamps.
You can't just claim that you don't have 5 years worth of checkable history and expect to get a staff airport ID.
im talking about non uk residents. It's much quicker and easier to get an airport ID if you are from another country, that's why handling agents, catering companies and cleaners are pretty much all from overseas. ,
I experienced it myself when I arrived in the UK from abroad, my airport ID and crb check we're much quicker than my UK colleagues. It's certainly not bulls
t thanks. I didn't need any crb check or equivalent from the countries I had been living in. El stovey said:
Shakermaker said:
El stovey said:
Even in the UK, it's significantly easier and quicker to get an airside ID if you've just arrived in the UK than it is for long term UK citizens due to lack of employment history etc.
.
Let me assure everyone else - this is complete bulls.
t from El Stovey. To get an airside ID for any UK airport you need to provide a minimum 5 year history, and undergo a full criminal record check.
If you didn't live in the country for any extended period you'll need to get an appropriate criminal records check from the country you were residing in, or if you were travelling or on gap year, show proof of entry/exit from various countries and your visa stamps.
You can't just claim that you don't have 5 years worth of checkable history and expect to get a staff airport ID.
im talking about non uk residents. It's much quicker and easier to get an airport ID if you are from another country, that's why handling agents, catering companies and cleaners are pretty much all from overseas. ,
I experienced it myself when I arrived in the UK from abroad, my airport ID and crb check we're much quicker than my UK colleagues. It's certainly not bulls
t thanks. The rules have changed a lot in the nearly 14 years I have been working at the airports and the situation I have described above is what is current. Maybe years ago, it was easier to get in, but these days, that is NOT the case. We have had to let staff go who have started with us, but then not been able to get hold of the necessary documents within a reasonable time for us to make it worthwhile keeping them on. Really capable staff, but who maybe lived in Qatar, India, or in a couple of cases, the USA, haven't been able to get hold of the documents necessary. Or of course, they have a criminal record in that country which they thought they could get away with and then just go with their heads held high.
Uggers said:
Rather than targeting passengers I think air-side operators in some of the less developed countries needs to be addressed. Put a high vis vest on and a fake ID lanyard and I don't think they would pick you up for a very long time.
Agree. Dress appropriately and hold yourself like you belong there are you can go a long way before you get challenged.RBH58 said:
Uggers said:
Rather than targeting passengers I think air-side operators in some of the less developed countries needs to be addressed. Put a high vis vest on and a fake ID lanyard and I don't think they would pick you up for a very long time.
Agree. Dress appropriately and hold yourself like you belong there are you can go a long way before you get challenged.Shakermaker said:
RBH58 said:
Uggers said:
Rather than targeting passengers I think air-side operators in some of the less developed countries needs to be addressed. Put a high vis vest on and a fake ID lanyard and I don't think they would pick you up for a very long time.
Agree. Dress appropriately and hold yourself like you belong there are you can go a long way before you get challenged.I don't have enough tin foil in the house to believe it's all about coercing people onto US or UK carriers. Equally cries that it's a "Muslim ban" are bogus too. Correlation does not equal causation.
Ref lithium batteries, one wonders if they are so dangerous why they are let on flights at all.
Personally even a very small chance that these measures help improve safety (even indirectly by prompting countries to be more diligent) then it's fair enough. No one is going to die from not being able to use their laptop on a flight.
Murph7355 said:
And AIUI this is what's driving the tightened measures in some locations and with some carriers.
I don't have enough tin foil in the house to believe it's all about coercing people onto US or UK carriers. Equally cries that it's a "Muslim ban" are bogus too. Correlation does not equal causation.
Ref lithium batteries, one wonders if they are so dangerous why they are let on flights at all.
Personally even a very small chance that these measures help improve safety (even indirectly by prompting countries to be more diligent) then it's fair enough. No one is going to die from not being able to use their laptop on a flight.
We have to do lot with batteries that go in the hold when they are attached to electric wheelchairs/scooters. The limit for lithium batteries is quite high but yes, they normally have to travel in the cabin with the passenger whereas regular wet/dry cell batteries go in the hold once they are safely disconnected to prevent causing a fire (such as happened in Manchester about 4 years ago). I don't have enough tin foil in the house to believe it's all about coercing people onto US or UK carriers. Equally cries that it's a "Muslim ban" are bogus too. Correlation does not equal causation.
Ref lithium batteries, one wonders if they are so dangerous why they are let on flights at all.
Personally even a very small chance that these measures help improve safety (even indirectly by prompting countries to be more diligent) then it's fair enough. No one is going to die from not being able to use their laptop on a flight.
Another point, US carriers always fly with their "Sky Marshals" as well - although not the UK carriers.
"U.S. likely to expand airline laptop ban to Europe: government officials"
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-airlines-ele...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-airlines-ele...
BlackLabel said:
"U.S. likely to expand airline laptop ban to Europe: government officials"
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-airlines-ele...
As if there weren't already enough reasons not to go!http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-airlines-ele...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff